Early Childhood Education

Elango, Sneha; García, Jorge Luis; Heckman, James J.; Hojman, Andrés

doi:10.3386/w21766

Cited by 130 publications

(148 citation statements)

References 55 publications

(101 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

128

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition to shedding light on the possible mechanism driving our results, this evidence is interesting because of the information it contains on the consequences of daycare 0-2 for children in more a✏uent families, who have received little attention in the literature (Elango et al, 2015). This group is the relevant one at the margin of daycare expansions in developed countries, where disadvantaged children are typically already covered by public daycare services.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Cognitive and Non-Cognitive Costs of Daycare 002 for Girls

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Exploiting admission thresholds in a Regression Discontinuity Design, we study the causal e↵ects of daycare at age 0-2 on cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes at age 8-14. One additional month in daycare reduces IQ by 0.5% (4.5% of a standard deviation). E↵ects for conscientiousness are small and imprecisely estimated. Psychologists suggest that children in daycare experience fewer one-to-one interactions with adults, which should be particularly relevant for girls who are more capable than boys of exploiting cognitive stimuli at an early age. In line with this interpretation, losses for girls are larger and more significant, especially in a✏uent families. JEL-Code: J13, I20, I28, H75

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Cognitive and Non-Cognitive Costs of Daycare 002 for Girls

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Researchers and policymakers have posited a wide range of explanations for differences between the Head Start results and those of early model programs like Perry preschool, including differences in program features, program intensity, and program targeting (Barnett, 2011;Bitler et al, 2014;Elango et al, 2015). We focus on one prominent explanation: that the care settings of control group children attenuated the reported effects for Head Start (e.g., National Forum on Early Childhood Policy and Programs, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compared to what? Variation in the impacts of early childhood education by alternative care type

Feller¹,

Grindal²,

Miratrix³

et al. 2016

Ann. Appl. Stat.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early childhood education research often compares a group of children who receive the intervention of interest to a group of children who receive care in a range of different care settings. In this paper, we estimate differential impacts of an early childhood intervention by alternative care setting, using data from the Head Start Impact Study, a large-scale randomized evaluation. To do so, we utilize a Bayesian principal stratification framework to estimate separate impacts for two types of Compliers: those children who would otherwise be in other center-based care when assigned to control and those who would otherwise be in home-based care. We find strong, positive short-term effects of Head Start on receptive vocabulary for those Compliers who would otherwise be in home-based care. By contrast, we find no meaningful impact of Head Start on vocabulary for those Compliers who would otherwise be in other center-based care. Our findings suggest that alternative care type is a potentially important source of variation in early childhood education interventions.

show abstract

“…Araujo et al 2016;Bauchmüller, Gørtz, and Rasmussen 2014;Walters 2015; for other studies see e.g. Anders et al 2012;Dearing, McCartney, and Taylor 2009;Keys et al 2013;Elango et al 2015). Barnett (2011), for instance, summarizes that the effects of participating in highquality programs on cognitive outcomes of children are much larger than for programs of average quality.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Information asymmetries between parents and educators in German childcare institutions

Camehl

Schober

Spieß

2018

Education Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Economic theory predicts market failure in the market for early childhood education and care (ECEC) due to information asymmetries. We empirically investigate information asymmetries between parents and ECEC professionals in Germany, making use of a unique extension of the Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP). We compare quality perceptions by parents and by professionals across 734 institutions. We detect considerable information asymmetries that differ across quality measures but less so by parental socio-economic background or center characteristics. Both similarly contribute to explaining variations in the information gap. We conclude that information is not readily available to parents; an issue that should be addressed by policy-makers. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Early Childhood Education

Cited by 130 publications

References 55 publications

Cognitive and Non-Cognitive Costs of Daycare 002 for Girls

Cognitive and Non-Cognitive Costs of Daycare 002 for Girls

Compared to what? Variation in the impacts of early childhood education by alternative care type

Information asymmetries between parents and educators in German childcare institutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About